hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] EOL 1.1 Release Branch
Date Fri, 04 Nov 2016 16:52:24 GMT
I'm -1 on this idea, for now.

We have been evaluating 1.1 and 1.2 for upgrade and whereas 1.1 will
survive all testing including large scale ITBLL tests, 1.2 will not - no
1.2, from 1.2.0 on up. I've found one issue (fixed), and am now trying to
nail down another.

I would like to see two things:

1. Others in the community step up to evaluate the stability of 1.1.7
versus 1.2.3 (or .4) using ITBLL with at least 1B rows of data, and report
in. Is it just me?

2. We do not declare 1.1 EOL until 1.2 is unquestionable stable according
to the most practical rigor we can throw at it with our tooling. Especially
because I still plan to resign as 0.98 RM soon, which I think will trigger
an EOL of that code line.

I will be resigning as 0.98 RM effective January 1 2017 and at that time
the community can discuss what to do with 0.98. From my point of view, I'm
done with spending time on it. Happy to take some of the time freed up and
use it to carry 1.1 forward if we are still making releases off this code
line then.

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@apache.org> wrote:

> Hello HBase Community!
> We have a small matter to discuss.
> HBase 1.2 has been formally marked as "stable" for the last couple months.
> HBase 1.3.0rc0 is just around the corner. I think it's time to start a
> conversation about retiring the 1.1 line. The volunteer bandwidth for
> maintaining multiple branches is precious and as we spread ourselves more
> thin, odds of decay increase.
> I propose discontinuing 1.1 with a single release following 1.3.1. That'll
> give us one last chance to back port any bug fixes discovered in the
> diligence we're putting into the new minor release. Given the current pace
> of 1.3, I estimate this will happen in January or February of 2017. It's
> not a lot of time for existing deployments to get around to upgrading, but
> the upgrade path is trivial and 1.2 has been available for quite some
> time. This will probably make our last release from this branch at 1.1.10
> or there abouts.
> Are there any objections or concerns with the above plan? Are there any
> downstream communities who need our help moving onto 1.2? Please let us
> know.
> Thanks,
> Nick

Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message